zapperfandomcom-20200214-history
Royal Rife
Introduction Royal Raymond Rife (May 16, 1888 – August 5, 1971) was an American inventor and early exponent of high-magnification time-lapse cine-micrography. Controversially, he attempted to cure diseases like cancer using machines that emitted various specific frequencies. Today, some people market portable devices that emit various frequencies as "Rife machines." There is some similarity between Rife's Ray machines and Hulda Clark's zapper and derivatives, in that they both aim at generating specific frequencies that will resonate with a pathogen's native frequency, thereby causing it to "devitalise," to use Rife's term. Rife's frequencies do not match Clark's frequencies, although possibly there is some harmonic correlation. Rife used pathogen-specific frequencies one at a time; Clark uses pathogen-specific frequencies to identify the pathogens where necessary, but a general one-frequency positive-offset direct-current zapper to more-or-less devitalise them all at once. Sidebands and audio sweep This information comes from a very thorough report on the Rife Videos site. Rife worked exclusively with high RF (radio frequency) frequencies. Frequencies in the range of approximately 10-20,000 Hz (1 Hz = 1 Hertz = 1 cycle per second) are known as "audio" frequencies, although being able to hear the frequencies in this range is irrelevant here. Rife's Beam Ray Clinical instrument used a carrier wave fixed at 3.3 MHz, and the various pathogen-specific frequencies were produced by modulating this carrier wave with harmonics in the audio band. Example of using audio harmonic sidebands to hit a particular radio frequency For example, let's look at Rife's audio figure of 1200 Hz for tetanus. 1200 Hz all by itself is NOT a devitalising frequency for the tetanus virus. Rife's figure for the devitalising frequency for tetanus is 234,000 Hz. Harmonics of 234,000 Hz occur at 468,000 Hz, 702,000 Hz, ... 3,276,000 Hz and higher. The idea is that any of these harmonic frequencies would devitalise tetanus, not just the primary frequency. The difference between the carrier wave of 3,300,000 Hz and this harmonic frequency of 3,276,000 Hz is 24,000 Hz. 24,000 Hz is 20 x 1200 Hz. So by modulating the fixed carrier frequency of 3,300,000 Hz with the (audio) frequency of 1200 Hz, one of the frequencies generated would be 3,276,000 Hz. Bingo! Audio frequencies are not the main devitalising agents To repeat, the audio frequencies are used to modulate the fixed RF carrier wave frequency, resulting in the chosen devitalising frequency being hit. Neither the RF carrier wave by itself, nor the audio frequency by itself, were instrumental in Rife's devitalisation procedures. Using an audio sweep to cover all desired frequencies Another example is what Rife calls the BX virus, with a primary devitalising frequency of 1,607,450 Hz and an audio frequency of 21,275 Hz. How that computes is 1,607,450 x 2 = 3,214,900; 3,300,000 - 3,214,900 = 85,100; and 85,100 = 4 x 21,275. So modulating the 3.3 MHz carrier frequency with the audio frequency of 21,275 Hz (and its harmonics) generates the BX-devitalising frequency of 1,607,450 Hz. If the audio generator sweeps through frequencies that include 1200 Hz and 21,275 Hz, then both the frequency for the tetanus virus and the frequency for the BX virus will have been hit. The question of how much power is needed, and how long the frequency needs to be directed are covered below. A few calculations will show that a fixed carrier wave like 3.3 MHz and a modulating audio frequency (with its harmonics) will cover the entire range of frequencies of interest. It does not even have to be the entire audio band from, say, 20 Hz up. Rife used 1200 Hz for tetanus, but he could equally well have used 2400 Hz or 6000 Hz or 12,000 Hz or 24,000 Hz. Can audio frequencies be beneficial? The best answer is "we don't know." Where someone has misinterpreted a list of audio frequencies that Rife used with a particular RF carrier wave to mean that those audio frequencies alone are beneficial, that is one thing. If a researcher has done independent research, not relying on such lists, and discovered beneficial results, and thoroughly reported his methodologies so they can be replicated by others, that is something else. But a mere list of audio frequencies along with conditions they supposedly address, with no explanation as to how the figures were derived, as one will usually find on the internet, is next to useless. Now, the above paragraph refers to a continual signal in the audio-range frequency band. A Clark-type pulsed zapper signal is different. A regular zapper operates in the audio band (well, audio for dogs). So an audio-programmable (pulsed) zapper would be at least as useful as a fixed-frequency zapper. Who knows what the effects of zapping using a menu of selected three-minute stretches of various harmonics or even the digitized frequencies of Beethoven's 9th might be? Combining Rife and Clark technologies This would make an interesting experimental device, if some electronics engineer could be persuaded to build it. At heart it would be a Clark-type zapper based on a 555 chip, powered by a regular 9-volt DC battery and outputting a positive-offset single-polarity DC signal. It would differ from a Clark-type zapper in two main respects: (1) Instead of a main output frequency of about 30,000 Hz it would have an RF main output frequency of about 1 MHz, and (2) this main RF signal would be modulated by audio frequencies. Perhaps this could be done using a similar principle to the audio-programmed zapper, so that one would only have to record a wav or mp3 track of the desired frequencies and then the APZ could be carried around and its audio input provided by a personal mp3 player or iPhone. The RF frequency would be used because of the finding that RF signals are needed to enter a cell, whereas the lower audio frequencies won't. There is some question that the penetration (or not) of the audio frequencies (and their higher harmonics) depends on the waveform, and this area needs further research. Why 1 MHz? The 555 chip will output up to about 1.5 MHz. Clark says the human body's own resonant frequency is about 1.5 MHz on up. 1 MHz seems to be comfortably away from this, although there may be harmonic effects. Since we don't seem to have dropped dead from using cell phones and other electronic devices, it seems safe to assume the effects from using this new 1 MHz device won't be especially lethal. The operation would depend upon the audio sweep methodology used by Rife. Since the desired frequencies are generated by harmonics and not directly, it does not matter that Clark's frequencies do not match Rife's frequencies. Clark's DC-offset zapper is frequency-independent, so the addition of the audio-harmonics sweep is a bonus, allowing two shots at the same target. Examples of using audio sidebands with a Clark frequency Example 1: 1 MHz carrier wave and Epstein Barr Virus (EBV) EBV primary frequency is 380,375 Hz. One harmonic (3 x 380,375) is at 1,141,125 Hz. Subtracting the 1,000,000 Hz carrier wave gives 141,125 Hz. Assuming a simple audio frequency generator that only goes up to 20,000 Hz, then dividing 141,125 by 7 gives too high a result. So let's divide by 8, and we get 141,125 / 8 = 17,640. So if we use a 17,640 Hz modulating frequency, its harmonic up at 141,125 (actually 141,120, but close enough) will be spot on. Example 2: 1 MHz carrier wave and blue-green algae Blue-green algae has a primary frequency of 256,000 Hz. One harmonic (4 x 256,000) is at 1,024,000 Hz. Subtracting 1,000,000 Hz for the carrier wave gives 24,000 Hz. That is twice 12,000 Hz. So we could use a modulating frequency of 12,000 Hz. Alternatively, another harmonic (3 x 256,000) is at 768,000 Hz. 1,000,000 - 768,000 is 232,000. 232,000 is 12 x 19,333. Another harmonic (2 x 256,000) is at 512,000. 1,000,000 - 512,000 = 488,000. 488,000 = 25 x 19,520. There are many more harmonics, of course. Since the power decreases as the harmonics differ from the primary frequency, there will be a point at which a high harmonic is ineffective. This needs further research. How slow or fast an audio sweep is acceptable? Let's assume that (1) directing the devitalising frequency for 3 minutes is adequate, and (2) 1/4% either way of the devitalising frequency is acceptable. These figures come from both Clark's and Rife's experimentation and are not arbitrary. So the audio sweep has to be slow enough that the frequency is in the "killing spread" for at least three minutes. Example 1: Epstein Barr Virus Referring to the figures above, the EBV primary frequency is 380,375 Hz with a harmonic at 1,141,125 Hz. Allowing 1/4% either way gives a "killing spread" of 1,138,272 Hz to 1,143,978 Hz. Subtracting the 1,000,000 Hz carrier wave gives 138,272 Hz to 143,978 Hz The associated audio frequencies are 8 x (17,284 Hz to 17,997 Hz). So the audio signal would need to be within the range 17,284 Hz to 17,997 Hz for at least 3 minutes. This is 713 Hz in 3 minutes. Since a standard Clark zapping cycle lasts at least 60 minutes, 713 Hz in 3 minutes equals 14,260 Hz in 60 minutes at the same sweep rate. This calculation ignores the effects of any other harmonics, but they would play a part too. Example 2: Blue-green algae The blue-green algae primary frequency is 256,000 Hz. Let's look at the harmonic at 768,000 Hz (3 x 256,000). Allowing 1/4% either way gives a kill range of 766,080 Hz to 769,920 Hz. Subtracting from the 1,000,000 Hz carrier wave gives 233,920 Hz to 230,080 Hz. The associated audio frequencies are 12 x (19,493 Hz to 19,173 Hz). So the audio signal would need to stay in the range of 19,173 Hz to 19,493 Hz for 3 minutes. This is 320 Hz for 3 minutes, or 6400 Hz for an hour at the same rate of sweep. This calculation ignores the effects of any other harmonics, but they would play a part too. Conclusions re audio modulation These two examples are not conclusive, but they give the general idea that an audio sweep of a few thousand Hz over 60 minutes will allow the frequencies to stay in the "killing range" for the required 3 minutes. More calculation, and experimentation, is required to determine which audio parameters work best (frequency range, timing, wave type square, triangle, sawtooth etc.). But since tweaking these audio parameters is relatively simple and does not require any hardware changes, then it should not hold up the design and construction of such a device. Power of the new device Generally speaking, more power is better than less power, in terms of ability to reach the pathogens one is addressing. But there are practical limits in terms of legality, expense, and health. Legality Possibly this regulation applies in the U.S.: On the standard AM broadcast band, transmission power is limited by 100 milliwatts of DC input power to the final RF stage, (with restrictions on size, height and type of antenna). Expense The general idea is to keep such a device in the realm of similar hobby-type devices, that can be built for a few tens of dollars. So it would be powered by something like a regular 9-volt battery or possibly two such batteries in parallel. Body limits From the Rife Videos report: Without an RF carrier frequency the audio frequencies will only go through the connective tissue and not the cell. There are exceptions to this and they have to do with the wave form of the frequency. If a square wave audio frequency is used then the higher harmonics produced from this waveform may penetrate the cell to some degree. How much power from these harmonics penetrates the cell is not known. But this may explain why instruments that do not use an RF carrier frequency also seem to work well. . . . Pad instruments that do not use a carrier frequency are limited in power. The highest power output that can be safely used from a non RF carrier pad instrument is about 1/5 of one watt (0.20 to 0.40). Any more power than this and the muscles of the body will begin to lock up. If you use an RF carrier frequency then you can output a hundred times more power safely. External links * Rife Videos, a site giving the history of Rife's machines and a careful analysis of their operation * http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Title_47_CFR_Part_15#Unlicensed_broadcasting, U.S. regulation on unlicensed broadcasting power allowed